Defining Pharisaism By Fleshing Out Its Confrontation by the Lord Jesus in His Sermon on the Mount
Terms like Pharisaism and legalism are often blunt instruments used today against churches and individual believers. They can be much like the word, racism. People weaponize terms to protect a belief or lifestyle through castigation. At the worst, they want to eliminate the objects of their scorn. Maybe they’re right about the ones they want to cancel and what they believe and practice. Is it true though? Are their targets really Pharisees and legalists?The Lord Jesus confronted Pharisaism and legalism with His Sermon on the on Mount in Matthew 5-7. The sermon explains salvation, but in a unique way to cast down the corrupt view of the Pharisees, the religion of the day. Their teaching was so prevalent everywhere, what Jesus then preached was also dealing with the thinking of everyone in His audience. Even if He wasn’t preaching to Pharisees, He was preaching to Pharisaism and legalism.
Christian Patriotism
Christian patriotism could sound like an oxymoron. Patriotism is devotion to and rigorous support of one’s country and Christian is devotion to and rigorous support of Jesus Christ. If you’re really a Christian, then there would not be room for patriotism. What is true about this?
At some point, some kind of patriotism isn’t Christian anymore. There’s a real danger of that. However, I believe patriotism can be consistent with being a Christian. It’s even good and right to a certain extent that is still in the bounds of actual patriotism. Some will disagree and I think in many cases it is harmful disagreement.
Right now, it seems to me that about thirty percent of Americans do not love the flag. In a recent article in the New York Times, an article, “A Fourth of July Symbol of Unity That May No Longer Unite,” starts by telling the story of a produce salesman, who couldn’t sell his potatoes to locals because he displayed the American flag. They associated that with something evil. The theme of the story is that the American flag is a polarizing symbol, not a unifying one.
The state itself wants to change the story of America that is told to children growing up in its school system. It’s a version of history that isn’t happy about America, let alone patriotic. I would assert that those who attack America are an almost exact overlap of those who will attack Christianity today. They’re the same people. Some patriotic Americans now don’t feel free expressing patriotism. Now the American flag associates with Christianity to many and they’re either happy or unhappy with it in a divisive way.
Where does patriotism go too far? God isn’t worshiped by singing a patriotic song; He isn’t. We won’t sing patriotic songs as an act of worship. Mormons have a view very close to the idea that the U.S. Constitution is inspired by God. That’s also not true.
Christian patriotism could be something in the trajectory of Paul’s claiming and using Roman citizenship. It was helpful to him based upon the providence of God. The providence of God is a practical ramification of the sovereignty of God. Because of the power, wisdom, and love of God, we can know that He allows and causes everything, so that He is working all things together for good to those who love God. We look for those ways.
The United States is an example of the providence of God, especially the idea of America, and any way that the scriptural aspects of this idea are upheld. By being patriotic, we are being thankful to God for what He has done. We want to support this. We want to hang on to this. We don’t want to lose this.
America is a part of the plan of God. God has used the country insofar that America has held to scriptural concepts and a belief in the true God. Righteousness has exalted the nation. Sin on the other hand is increasingly though being a reproach to the nation, and genuine Christians would do well as salt to retard that corruption in a patriotic manner.
Christian patriotism is loyal to the preservation of a righteous nation as salt. Why retard corruption? Why not let the nation die? This isn’t God’s will for a Christian. A true patriot will embrace what makes America great and preserve it. To keep it, you’ve got to know what it is. You’ve got to teach it. When people try to keep you from teaching it, you try to do something about that.
Christian patriotism connects with something in the past to celebrate. There is something to shoot off fireworks, wear red, white, and blue, and be thankful to God. Nations are in the will of God. The preservation of those nations requires true affection for what truly makes them great. Patriotism and this affection might be one and the same.
Fight Google’s Censorship!
Is Google still your default search engine? If so, you are helping an anti-Bible, anti-morality, pro-sodomy, pro-perversion, anti-God company with every search you make. They also intend to censor you and to eliminate your voice if they can. For example, if you search for “Homosexuality is wicked,” the top result (as of when I wrote this article) is an article that laughably claims that sodomy is not condemned by Scripture, and other pro-sodomy articles are in the top page of results. If you search on the search engine DuckDuckGo, the top result is an article entitled “Five Biblical Reasons Homosexuality is Worse than Most Other Sins” and practically every other article on the first page is anti-sodomy, with the anti-sodomy articles being stronger against this perversion than the ones on Google. Do you really think that the top results on Google are unbiased, or is Google putting a heavy thumb on the scale? If you search for “scientific creationism” on DuckDuckGo, the first page includes links to the Institute for Creation Research and Answers in Genesis. Neither website is on the first page in a Google search. Do you think that is by chance? If you search for “Hunter Biden China collusion,” the top result on DuckDuckGo is an article from the leading conservative organization National Review entitled “A Collusion Trail: China and the Bidens.” On Google, National Review does not appear anywhere on page one and this article is at the very bottom of page 2. Chance? Oh, no!
DuckDuckGo is not specifically conservative–it just doesn’t have the leftist bias of Google. DuckDuckGo just puts up what most people actually are searching for when they do Internet searches. While some interaction with wicked companies is unavoidable, breaking your tie with Google here is easy. Open your “preferences” file in the browser(s) you use right now (it may be some dots in the top right corner of your browser, or it may be in a menu) and change the default search engine from Google to DuckDuckGo. Do it on your phone. Do it on your laptop. Do it on everything. Google wants your data to make money, but it doesn’t want your beliefs. It wants to destroy them. Stop giving Google money with your Internet searches, and resist Google’s censorship of God’s truth. It takes about five minutes. Do it now.
–TDR
Book Review: Parenting AAA: God’s Goals and Guidelines for Generational Spiritual Reproduction by Timothy Paul Geist
Timothy Geist is a pastor with Robert Sargent at Bible Baptist Church in Oak Harbor, Washington, a sister church. He was a career Naval officer before he surrendered to and was ordained a pastor. In late 2020, he completed and his church published his book, Parenting AAA: God’s Goals and Guidelines for Generational Spiritual Reproduction. I hope you get it. It’s a good book on parenting, and every parent needs scriptural help.
You will enjoy Geist’s book, whether you are a church leader or member, written in a style that digs deep but communicates in an understandable and practical manner. He bases everything on the Bible and takes and proves all of his points from scripture. Triple A sounds like a ranch or an auto insurance company, but it is the main outline of his book: Authority, Associations, and Appropriation. In his preface, he presents a helpful chart that summarizes the book nicely, providing scripture to buttress each point. It allows you to own the entire content of his book with the easy-to-remember outline.
Someone could ruin a book on parenting by missing the point or the main points. Geist doesn’t do that. As I’m reading, I’m nodding my head and saying, “He’s got it right.” My assessment is coming from someone who did not do as good a job as he did, and I wish I had. It’s painful in that way, but a good kind of hurt that could prepare to aid others.
Geist does not skip any aspect of parenting. Very often parenting books deal very well with one or two aspects and leave out others. His book will help you if you aren’t yet a parent, are one of small children, or your kids are teenagers. He doesn’t avoid the difficult topics in accomplishing this task. He has the advantage of his children being old enough and his having seen success with them. He has practiced what he preached.
Each main point in the book divides nicely into full and practical doctrine and practice. Under authority, he writes on rules, relationship, and reason, giving a means of accomplishment, all fleshed out from and starting with the Bible. He deals with the pitfalls that very often cause the failings for a parent.
As an example of the power and usefulness of the book, regarding relationship, which deals with a parent developing a relationship with his children, he emphasizes time, talk, and touch. Those might seem like no-brainers, and they might be on paper, but every parent needs that emphasis. He shows the scriptural nature of all of those means to a genuine, godly relationship of a parent with his child.
Geist has married, adult children, who wed godly spouses. That didn’t just happen. He followed the biblical doctrine and practice laid out in his book. There is a right way and he explains it. He divides all associations into people and things and spends sufficient time on each of those to deal with friends, heroes, music, television and movies, and education. These are all tough subjects and he’s got a section on all of them as they relate to parenting.
Nobody will probably get everything right when it comes to parenting. Geist comes as close as I’ve seen anybody. You should take advantage of what he’s offering and buy a copy for you and others that you know.
Winning Someone and Winning Over Someone
I was sitting in the doctor’s office today for an appointment for my dad. I go with him to all his appointments, which are many. Usually it is also accompanied by medical decisions, such as tweaking a few of his medications, including his insulin intake. I pulled up today’s list of articles at Realclearpolitics while waiting, and one of them was from the New York Times, titled, “Progressives’ Urgent Question: How to Win Over Voters of Color.” I didn’t immediately read the article, but my mind began weighing the difference between “winning someone” and “winning someone over.” Were those two different from each other? I thought so.
Can progressives win broad numbers of the Black and brown voters they say their policies will benefit most?
Bible Study #6: Eternal Security and Assurance of Salvation
I am pleased to let What is Truth? readers know that the video for evangelistic Bible study #6, “The Christian: Security in Christ and Assurance of Salvation,” is now available. The videos teach that once one is truly converted, he is always saved. Assurance is explained Biblically–it is based on the marks given by God in 1 John of a new nature–rather than being based on ideas made by man, such as that those repeating a “sinner’s prayer” should have assurance, or everyone who ever thinks he made a salvation decision should have assurance.
So now we have available video teaching of Bible studies #1-6:
Bible Study #1: What is the Bible?
Bible Study #2: Who is God?
Bible Study #3: What Does God Want From Me?
Bible Study #4: How Can God Save Sinners?
Bible Study #5: How Do I Receive the Gospel?
Bible Study #6: The Christian: Security in Christ and Assurance of Salvation
Only study #7, on the Church of Christ, does not yet have its video available.
I would encourage you and your church to consider doing these Bible studies one-on-one with people who are open to God’s Word, and if someone is unwilling to do a Bible study in person to share the videos. Those who are seeking an example of how to teach them to others will likely find the video helpful.
Click here to watch Bible Study #6: “The Christian: Security in Christ and Assurance of Salvation.”
The actual Bible studies can be downloaded as PDF files on the Bible study page here. On the All Content page at FaithSaves you can also download a Word document that you can put your church’s contact information into.
You can also help the content of this evangelistic Bible study get out by “liking” and commenting on the video on YouTube and subscribing to the KJB1611 YouTube channel.
–TDR
The Lie or Deceit of the Warfare or Conflict Model Between Science and Faith
True science proceeds from faith. The historical record shows that modern science arose from faith in God. Science and faith harmonize. They don’t conflict.
Like the tearing down of statues in the United States, the elimination of genders unto gender fluidity, and the revisionism of patriarchy as social construct, secular materialists banish faith from the public square by falsifying the true story of faith and science. The false narrative, useful for dethroning God in the hearts of men, says Newton’s science triumphed despite and hindered by his faith. His belief slowed his work. The actual narrative would read something like the following: man’s thinking, human reasoning, implausible speculation, superstition, darkness, little to no scientific progress, publication and propagation of scripture, motivation to know God through His creation, observation, scientific method, discovery and progress (subduing and having dominion).
Whatever scientific progress continues is built upon the foundation of biblical creationists of the past and borrowing from and imitating their work, even if it is separate from faith. The riddance of faith portends to future regression, even as we see this trend and trajectory already. For instance, without the faith in the invisible hand, the world economy is headed back to something more feudalistic.
Faux historians produced the science and faith warfare or conflict model in the late 19th century and this myth, legend, or figment of imagination burrowed itself deep into the psyche of Western civilization. It isn’t history. It is a philosophical presupposition of naturalism masquerading as science. Stephen Meyer writes about this in his most recent book, Return of the God Hypothesis.
Most science historians report the fideistic beginnings of modern science. The founders believed in God and their faith buttressed their work. A few men told a completely different story, John William Draper’s History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science (1880) and Andrew Dickson White’s History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896). Commenting on this happening, historian Edward Larson writes in his Pulitzer Prize winning book that “they fostered the impression that religious critics of Darwinism threatened to rekindle the Inquisition. . . . Christianity and Science are recognized by their respective adherents as being absolutely incompatible; they cannot exist together; one must yield to the other; mankind must make its choice—it cannot have both” (Summer for the Gods: The Scope’s Trial and America’s Continuing Debate over Science and Religion, pp. 21-22). These above two books helped or aided to fix in the amassed minds that science and faith were at war with one another and always have been. Their lie displaced or deposed actual history. Now it is very, very difficult to dislodge.
The warfare or conflict model buttresses the uniformitarian template that man lives in a closed system without supernatural or divine intervention. It eliminates design with everything occurring according to chance. This view cancels God, His authority over and judgment of mankind. Man gets to live like he wants, because nobody’s going to do anything about it. Many if not a majority of professing Christians now at least surrender to this viewpoint, clashing with the Bible and a true, historical account.
The Evidence of Things Not Seen
In the King James Version, Hebrews 11:1 calls “faith,” “the evidence of things not seen.” How is faith itself evidence? Does the English word “evidence” in the King James Version mean the same thing as what we think it means today? It is close, but I believe there is evidence (pun intended) to say that “evidence” in Hebrews 11:1 means something a little different than what we think it means.Faith itself doesn’t seem to be evidence as we understand the meaning of evidence. It is based on evidence, but not itself evidence. Evidence itself is proof. The slight difference in understanding would be that faith is the “proving to yourself” things unseen. The Greek word elegchos is found only here in the New Testament. However, the verb form, elegcho, is used 17 times in the New Testament, it would have the same root meaning as the noun, and it’s classic and first usage in the New Testament is found in John 16:8, used by Jesus:
And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.
Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.
Faith demonstrates to the eye of the mind the reality of those things that cannot be discerned by the eye of the body. Faith is the firm assent of the soul to the divine revelation and every part of it, and sets to its seal that God is true. It is a full approbation of all that God has revealed as holy, just, and good; it helps the soul to make application of all to itself with suitable affections and endeavours; and so it is designed to serve the believer instead of sight, and to be to the soul all that the senses are to the body. That faith is but opinion or fancy which does not realize invisible things to the soul, and excite the soul to act agreeably to the nature and importance of them.
Shame, Folly, and Conspiracy Theories
I have been thinking about this since writing my post on getting vaccinated for COVID and also my post “Satanic Conspiracy, COVID-19, and the Church’s Response.” I am not writing this to rehash the contents of those posts. I would encourage those who disagreed–and those who agreed–with the posts to consider the following Biblical principles before we are convinced by or share as true any conspiracy.
1.) Have I examined both sides of the case for the alleged conspiracy?
Prov. 18:13 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.
Prov. 18:17 He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him.
Before telling others, spreading on social media, or in any other way adopting or encouraging others to adopt a conspiracy as true, have I carefully examined both sides of the issue? Have I only read people who agree with the conclusion I am predisposed to, or have I read not just arguments for the conspiracy, but also strong arguments against it, and can I refute the arguments against it? If people challenge my belief in the conspiracy, do I take it personally and react to them emotionally–so that, perhaps, they are not even willing to bring problems with my view, and I place myself in an echo chamber where only those who agree with me are willing to say anything–or do I evaluate what contrary opinions say rationally and dispassionately?
If we do not do this, and promote something which is false because we have not read nor refuted the arguments for the contrary view, it is shame and folly.
2.) Have I exercised great care in my investigation?
Deut. 13:14 Then shalt thou enquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain …
Job 29:16 [T]he cause which I knew not I searched out.
Have I made sure that sources that allegedly prove the conspiracy are not taken out of context? Am I looking at the original source, or what someone said that someone said that someone said? Can I provide a rational mechanism for how what the conspiracy says happened could have taken place, and can I show that other, simpler or less extraordinary explanations fail? Are the sources reliable ones? Do I know the bias of the sources I am citing? We should be very, very careful before assuming a testimonial, a YouTube video, or some other source that would not make it in a high-school research paper or on Wikipedia is giving us the truth while published, peer-reviewed results by people with tremendous knowledge of the field they are writing about are telling us falsehoods. It is not impossible, but if we are going to make an extraordinary claim like this we need extraordinary evidence.
If we do not follow the two principles above we risk getting taken advantage of by shysters, con-men, and other liars. We risk bringing reproach to the name of Christ when we utter falsehoods as Christians. We can put at risk our lives, health, and livelihoods, and the lives, health, and livelihoods of others.
Consider also many of the principles in the Westminster Larger Catechism on the Ninth Commandment, “Thou shalt not bear false witness”:
Question 144
What are the duties required in the ninth commandment?
The duties required in the ninth commandment are, the preserving and promoting of truth between man and man, (Zech. 8:16) and the good name of our neighbour, as well as our own; (3 John 12) appearing and standing for the truth; (Prov. 31:8–9) and from the heart, (Ps. 15:2) sincerely, (2 Chron. 19:9) freely, (1 Sam. 19:4–5) clearly, (Josh. 7:19) and fully, (2 Sam. 14:18–20) speaking the truth, and only the truth, in matters of judgment and justice, (Lev. 19:15, Prov. 14:5,25) and in all other things whatsoever; (2 Cor. 1:17–18, Eph. 4:25) a charitable esteem of our neighbours; (Heb. 6:9, 1 Cor. 13:7) loving, desiring, and rejoicing in their good name; (Rom 1:8, 2 John 4, 3 John 3–4) sorrowing for, (2 Cor. 2:4, 2 Cor. 12:21) and covering of their infirmities; (Prov. 17:9, 1 Pet. 4:8) freely acknowledging of their gifts and graces, (1 Cor. 1:4–5,7, 2 Tim. 1:4–5) defending their innocency; (1 Sam. 22:14) a ready receiving of a good report, (1 Cor. 13:6–7) and unwillingness to admit of an evil report, (Ps. 15:3) concerning them; discouraging tale-bearers, (Prov. 25:23) flatterers, (Prov. 26:24–25) and slanderers; (Ps. 101:5) love and care of our own good name, and defending it when need requireth; (Prov. 22:1, John 8:49) keeping of lawful promises; (Ps. 15:4) studying and practicing of whatsoever things are true, honest, lovely, and of good report. (Phil. 4:8)
Question 145
What are the sins forbidden in the ninth commandment?
The sins forbidden in the ninth commandment are, all prejudicing the truth, and the good name of our neighbours, as well as our own, (1 Sam. 17:28, 2 Sam. 16:3, 2 Sam. 1:9,10,15–16) especially in public judicature; (Lev. 19:15, Hab. 1:4) giving false evidence, (Prov. 19:5, Prov. 6:16,19) suborning false witnesses, (Acts 6:13) wittingly appearing and pleading for an evil cause, out-facing and overbearing the truth; (Jer. 9:3,5, Acts 24:2,5, Ps. 12:3–4, Ps. 52:1–4) passing unjust sentence, (Prov. 17:15, 1 Kings 21:9–14,10–11,13) calling evil good, and good evil; rewarding the wicked according to the work of the righteous, and the righteous according to the work of the wicked; (Isa. 5:23) forgery, (Ps. 119:69, Luke19:8, Luke 16:5–7) concealing the truth, undue silence in a just cause, (Lev. 5:1, Deut. 13:8, Acts 5:3,8–9, 2 Tim. 4:16) and holding our peace when iniquity calleth for either a reproof from ourselves, (1 Kings1:6, Lev. 19:17) or complaint to others; (Isa. 59:4) speaking the truth unseasonably, (Prov. 29:11) or maliciously to a wrong end, (1 Sam. 22:9–10, Ps. 52:1–5) or perverting it to a wrong meaning, (Ps. 56:5, John 2:19, Matt. 26:60–61) or in doubtful or equivocal expressions, to the prejudice of truth or justice; (Gen. 3:5, Gen. 26:7,9) speaking untruth, (Isa. 59:13) lying, (Lev. 19:11, Col. 3:9) slandering, (Ps. 50:20) backbiting, (James 4:11, Jer. 38:4) talebearing, (Lev. 19:16) whispering, (Rom. 1:29–30) scoffing, (Gen. 21:9, Gal. 4:29) reviling, (1 Cor. 6:10) rash, (Matt. 7:1) harsh, (Acts 28:4) and partial censuring; (Gen. 38:24, Rom. 2:1) misconstructing intentions, words, and actions; (Neh. 6:6–8, Rom. 3:8, Ps. 69:10, 1 Sam. 1:13–15, 2 Sam. 10:3) flattering, (Ps. 12:2–3) vain-glorious boasting; (2 Tim. 3:2) thinking or speaking too highly or too meanly of ourselves or others; (Luke 18:9,11, Rom. 12:16, 1 Cor. 4:6, Acts 12:22, Exod. 4:10–14) denying the gifts and graces of God; (Job 27:5,6, Job 4:6) aggravating smaller faults; (Matt. 7:3–5) hiding, excusing, or extenuating of sins, when called to a free confession; (Prov. 28:13, Prov. 30:20, Gen. 3:12–13, Jer. 2:35, 2 Kings 5:25, Gen. 4:9) unnecessary discovering of infirmities; (Gen. 9:22, Prov. 25:9–10) raising false rumors, (Exod. 23:1) receiving and countenancing evil reports, (Prov. 29:12) and stopping our ears against just defense; (Acts 7:56–57, Job 31:13–14) evil suspicion; (1 Cor. 13:5, 1 Tim. 6:4) envying or grieving at the deserved credit of any, (Numb. 11:29, Matt. 21:15) endeavoring or desiring to impair it, (Ezra 4:12–13) rejoicing in their disgrace and infamy; (Jer. 48:27) scornful contempt, (Ps. 35:15–16,21, Matt. 27:28–29) fond admiration; (Jude 16, Acts 12:22) breach of lawful promises; (Rom. 1:31, 2 Tim. 3:3) neglecting such things as are of good report, (1 Sam. 2:24) and practicing, or not avoiding ourselves, or not hindering what we can in others, such things as procure an ill name. (2 Sam. 13:12–13)
If we consider the two questions at the beginning of this post, and the principles found in the Ninth Commandment, we will in a greater way glorify the Lord. Let’s make sure we do this before we adopt, promote, share with others, or in any other way support conspiracy theories (and consider these principles in all other areas of our life as well that involve rational thought).
If after reading this post, your reaction is to post insults in the comment section, tell me that I am just a stooge of Big Pharma, QAnon, or whatever else, and try to promote some conspiracy that you have not read, much less been able to refute arguments against, and which fail the tests found in the verses in this post, kindly re-read the post and pay a bit more attention.
–TDR
Recent Comments